Damen

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Mar 2, 2007 -> 01:29 PM) This just proves that George W. Bush is in control of EVERYTHING. /rolly When you can't think of a way to defend the indefensible, fall back on lame sarcasm. Works every time.

no gamecast or anything for this game?

http://washingtonbureau.typepad.com/iraq/

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Feb 9, 2007 -> 09:00 PM) So, it appears that back in 2003, the Iranians sent a Fax to the State Department through a Swiss intermediary proposing the outlines of negotiations towards a full long-term settlement, on topics including full transparency of Iran's nuclear program, agreements on disarmament of Iran's other chemical weapons systems, ending of Iranian military assistance to Hezbollah, Iranian support of the Saudi proposal for a 2-state solution in Palestine, and support for the establishment of a democratic and independent Iraqi government. As far as we can tell, the U.S. government appears to have not even bothered replying, and in fact responded by complaining to the Swiss about it. Seems we thought that Iran was about to fall apart completely, or something like that. Oops. Whether or not it was 100% sincere, if nothing else, basically it seems to have offered up everything the U.S. could have wanted from Iran, and therefore could have formed the basis for talks (and in fact it seems to have even included an outline for how the talks could progress). And on top of that, for some strange reason, our current Secretary of State testified yesterday that she did not remember the U.S. receiving that fax. link, but thankfully, the good people at Newsweek happen to have unearthed a copy of it to jog her memory a little more. So, let's see, Iran offers up everything we want, we say no, and before 6 years are up, we wind up bombing them for the same things they offered. This will truly be a triumph of something. Not sure exactly what. Speaking of Iran, here's something highly worth reading, given the administration propaganda granted front page status in the (liberal) New York Times

QUOTE(Jenksismyb**** @ Feb 8, 2007 -> 04:07 PM) Pssh, I'll say it. It's a good thing for the kid she's gone. Sounds harsh, but I'm willing to bet that 30 years from now her kid is gonna look back at her crack-head mom and go 'Damn, I'm glad she didn't raise me.' Seriously, did anyone watch/see clips of her show on E! It's not much of a surprise that her son was on drugs and OD'd..... The kid will have a ton of money and a chance at a normal life. I can't disagree.

100 degrees and high humidity is unpleasant. -40 windchills are painful. Plus, if it's 100, you can spend a day in the air conditioning or at the beach and know that in a week, the temps will be back in the 80's. Whereas today, we can look forward to temps getting back in the 20's. I dont' mind winter, but I'll take the summahtime extremes any day.

QUOTE(Vance Law @ Feb 7, 2007 -> 12:51 PM) I think the main improvement was always going to have to come from players rebounding from '06. The pitching players. Most importantly, the starters. Our 4 starters from last year need to have notably better years for us to improve. How else could we improve the starting pitching? The free agent market? What free agent starters could you have said, with a reasonable degree of certainty, would definitely be an upgrade on one of ours? Matsuzaka for $100+ million, which would have required a bid of $52 million just to talk with him. Zito for $126 million? Debatable even that he'd be an upgrade even in the short term when you stick him in our park and that contract is a disaster. We were never going to make those deals. The bullpen, meanwhile, was upgraded in my opinion. I'm pretty psyched about the arms we got. we'll have to see how they pan out. Anyone who says the bullpen is worse, I'll say "hey that's your guesstimate. I prefer my guesstimate." There are question marks. Question marks, calculated risks, often times pan out. We had question marks in '05. We seemingly had fewer question marks in '06 and see what happened. The Tigers certainly had a lot of question marks last year. The Yankees are the one team who seem to buy their way into the fewest question marks and when was the last time they were in the World Series? I agree with you, for the most part. I'm glad Williams stayed away from the free agent hysteria this offseason. Still, I'm still a little disappointed that we traded Garcia and McCarthy, and recieved very little in return that will help us in 2007. Gavin Floyd will not pitch better than Brandon McCarthy this season, if ever.

QUOTE(ptatc @ Feb 7, 2007 -> 12:13 PM) When you look at the budget you need to remember how revenue is generated. Yes, attandance increased but the windfall from the playoffs from the previous year was not there. The clubs make a great deal of money from the playoffs. The players are paid during the regular season. Playoff money is pure profit. So while the actual budget didn't change, the increased attendance allowed it to stay flat without the playoff windfall. The club did use the money from attendance to do this so it should not tick you off. Not necessarily true. A lot of players have bonuses structured into their contracts regarding making the playoffs/playoff performance. I'm sure the organization still makes quite a bit (on increased merch alone), but its not pure profit.

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/lapelpin.asp Judging by the way it was written and the fact its four years old, I doubt its true.

QUOTE(Jimbo @ Feb 7, 2007 -> 09:22 AM) My favorite player...he still sucks on the field this year... Stop boozing Brian Jimbo's Drinker telling someone to stop boozing? I really don't think that's his problem. 272/325/412

Even though I like the way Kenny approached this offseason, any improvement in our teams chances this year will come from players rebounding from substandard years in '06, because we didn't do much to improve the team over the offseason. We addressed the backup C position and the bullpen (although the guys we acquired still have some large question marks). How we went through the offseason without improving LF, I don't know. That is far and away the biggest failure of the offseason.

The author is painting a misleading picture when he talks of global cooling in the 70's.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Feb 2, 2007 -> 06:04 AM) I think the problem is more along the lines of the complaints about GWB not sending enough troops to 'get the job done' and then as soon as he proposes a surge, at that very moment it becomes a bad idea. If the surge that he proposed doesn't meet the criteria you had previously outlined for what would be needed to make such an effort worthwhile, then opposing that does not mean you changed stances. Virtually everyone that I've seen accused of "flip-flopping" on this had an argument vastly more detailed than "more troops." If you only look at one sentence where they say they could be in favor of more troops, then you wouldn't know that, and they'd appear hypocritical.

QUOTE(Hawkfan @ Feb 2, 2007 -> 01:42 AM) How do you drink a good beer properly? (and i'm being completely serious) I'm referring to the "no fruit in beer" man law. If you're drinking certain wheat beers, they almost require a lemon.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 1, 2007 -> 05:36 PM) The center is not a "mythical construct". Its where most of the country lies. And the thing is, if you have been studying poli sci for a while as I and others here have, you'll find that the two parties used to be much closer to that center and each other than they are now. Heck, it used to be a joke among Europeans, that we have a 2-party 1-party system. Not any more. And as I've said before, I suspect that whichever party fields a candidate NOT in the depths of their party line, and closer to center, will win the 2008 Prez election. I think the tide is turning against the extremism amongst many of the "swing" voters, and they want someone not at the far ends of the spectrum. I'm not saying there is not a center, period. Merely, what is often thought of or referred to as the center in most discourse in mainstream media is often at odds with what polling data shows the legitimate center is as defined by the public. And when you say "both parties have gotten so far from the center", then I've got to wonder what you consider the center to be? Everything the democrats have passed so far has received broad public support. How is that governing far from the center? On edit: This is kind of an example of what I'm talking about MSNBC Analyst and Hardball Guesthost Mike Barnicle on Imus: This statement is absolute sh*t. He couldn't name one "official in the Democratic Party" who would list gay marriage as a top issue. After Iraq, most Dems would list health care, education, and economics as the top issues of the day. What's more, Jim Webb is significantly more populist, and thus, to the left, of many in the Democratic party on economic issues. Yet, somehow, he has been thought of as a centrist, or even conservative, Dem pulling the party back to the center by advocating policies that are farther to the left. It makes absolutely no sense, for a reason. "The center" cited most often in discourse isn't about subtance. It's about style.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 1, 2007 -> 01:36 PM) Numerous reasons for this problem. For one, the two people we had in the 2004 election for President were both studies in going to an extreme for no good reason. Bush's adamant denial of reality, and Kerry's spineless noodleing on every issue. Another problem is of course that the parties themselves have gotten so far from center, that the debate has become mired in flith with no substance at all. Yet another reason, since 9/11, we are faced as a nation with a new reality, one which has no easy answer (despite the intellectually lazy efforts by some to find one). I'd like to agree, except for the part about the center. I think "the center" is more mythical construct, repeated endlessly by braindead pundits, than reality. Due to that, when people talk of "the center", I don't believe that idea has any substance to it either. Moreover, its often when politicians strain themselves to satisfy the pundit cries of "Move to the center!" that you start to get hypocracy that seems more rooted in political posturing than any change in beliefs.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 1, 2007 -> 07:55 AM) The bankruptcy laws are still too lenient, that's why. ...for Corporations, who can afford to donate millions to lobbyists.

QUOTE(Hawkfan @ Jan 31, 2007 -> 02:04 PM) dude, the whole idea of man laws was created long before burt reynolds came around Always give thanks to the beer man, unless he is a rookie and serves it at an inadequate temperature Yes, but it wasn't until Miller Lite came along that I'd have to listen to morons sputter on about how i'm not allowed to drink good beer properly, because apparently that makes you gay. Anytime I hear someone quote a "Man Law" seriously, I hope for the day they drown in a lake of pig s***.

White Sox Man Law: Do not allow a failed corporate advertising strategy to influence your behavior in any way, shape, or form. Doing so does not make you a man, it makes you a tool. However, if Burt Reynolds offers you advice when he is not being paid to do so, adhere to it immediately.

QUOTE(shoota @ Jan 29, 2007 -> 05:39 PM) Hopefully not. I meant in terms of our capability to compete for the division crown. As disappointing as last year was, we were still a 90 win team.

QUOTE(NUKE @ Jan 29, 2007 -> 03:41 PM) LOL! Im not really concerned about what it sounds like as long as it drives the point home. That was really my point is that using obnoxious sarcasm soooooo does not get whatever point you may think you have across. If you disagree with anything, you should be able to explain where you disagree and what the correct view. Granted, I haven't been on these boards as long as you all have, but when I see more than the necessary amount of "o's" in a word, it doesn't me think "hmm, he disagrees with my thoughts, I should understand what he has to say to see if it has merit." No, it makes me think I'm arguing with Blossom. And who wants to do that when Six is next door?

This season is make or break for our scouts. Most of these trades are based off of guys who don't have the numbers yet but are promised to be studs. If these pan out, I feel extremely confident in the Sox maintaining their position in the Central for some time. If not, we've got some tough years ahead.

QUOTE(NUKE @ Jan 29, 2007 -> 07:32 AM) Yeah, like negotiating with the North Koreans worked SOOOOOOOO well huh? /rolly Can you be in the military and still use sarcasm like a 13 year old girl?

QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Jan 16, 2007 -> 07:32 PM) The interesting thing is that she only LOOKS drunk. Her speech is not really slurrred and she's making perfect sense. Play it again and don't look at the screen. I tried. She sounds either wasted or retarded. Likely both.